CVE-2014-7462
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe Fashion Story: Neon 90's (aka com.teamlava.fashionstory39) application 1.5.6.5 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe Android application Fashion Story: Neon 90's version 1.5.6.5 fails to validate X.509 certificates when establishing SSL/TLS connections. This allows man-in-the-middle attackers on the same network to intercept traffic by presenting a forged certificate, potentially exposing sensitive user data transmitted by the app.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= _neon_90\'sCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:A/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify the vulnerable app is installedCheck if the Android app 'Fashion Story: Neon 90s' (package name typically com.teamlava.fashionstoryneon) is installed on the device using 'adb shell pm list packages' or via Settings > AppsAffected if The app is present on the device
-
Confirm the affected versionCheck the installed version in Android Settings > Apps > Fashion Story: Neon 90s > Version, or run 'adb shell dumpsys package com.teamlava.fashionstoryneon | grep versionName'Affected if Version is 1.5.6.5 (the only version listed as affected in this CVE)
-
Test for certificate validation failureSet up a man-in-the-middle proxy (such as Burp Suite or OWASP ZAP) with a self-signed certificate on the network, configure the device to use the proxy, and attempt to intercept traffic while the app is in useAffected if The app successfully transmits data through the proxy without certificate warnings or errors, indicating it accepts invalid X.509 certificates
The environment is affected if Fashion Story: Neon 90s version 1.5.6.5 is installed and the app accepts self-signed/invalid SSL certificates during network communication, allowing MITM attacks.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataImplement proper SSL certificate validation in the Android app using a custom TrustManager that validates the certificate chain, and ensure hostname verification is enabled. Consider certificate pinning for additional security.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-7462 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2014-7462 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data